Oliver Sacks and the Binding Power of Rhythm

Neurologist Oliver Sacks has conjectured that rhythm serve as a binding force both within individual brains and at the level of societies.

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American


In my last post, an appreciation of neurologist and author Oliver Sacks, I described him as an "anti-theorist," who emphasizes the irreducible individuality of each of his patients. But Sacks has presented more conventional, specific theories about the brain and mind.

In his 2007 book Musicophilia, for example, he floats a theory that builds upon the work of other scientists, notably psychologist Merlin Donald and biologist Francis Crick. In his 1991 book Origins of the Modern Mind, Donald proposes that human culture—language, the arts, religion, science—can be traced back to our primate compulsion toward imitation, mimicry, mimesis. Donald calls rhythm “the quintessential mimetic skill,” noting that “once a rhythm is established, it may be played out with any motor modality, including the hands, feet, mouth, or the whole body.”

In Musicophila, Sacks offers abundant examples of what Donald calls the “integrative-mimetic” power of rhythm, especially as embodied in music. A Grateful Dead concert restores some semblance of a self to “The Last Hippy,” a profoundly brain-damaged patient named Greg. Although not a Deadhead himself, Sacks finds himself swaying and singing along with others at the concert. Music also binds together the pieces of minds rent apart by Alzheimer’s, and integrates mind and body in people suffering from Parkinson’s.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Referring to a theory championed by Crick and Christof Koch, Sacks adds that ordinary, healthy minds may depend crucially on rhythm.  He explains:

Neuroscientists sometimes speak of "the binding problem," the process by which different perceptions or aspects of perception are bound together and unified. What enables us, for example, to bind together the sight, sound, smell and emotions aroused by the sight of a jaguar? Such binding in the nervous system is accomplished by rapid, synchronized firing of nerve cells in different parts of the brain. Just as rapid neuronal oscillations bind together different functional parts within the brain and nervous system, so rhythm binds together the individual nervous systems of a human community.

 Impressed by the scope and ambition of this passage, I wrote “Wow!” in the margin beside it. When I interviewed Sacks in 2008 at my school, Stevens Institute of Technology, he modestly downplayed this rhythm proposal, and he objected when I described it as a "theory of everything." But if string theory qualifies as a theory of everything, surely Sacks’s vision of a world bound together by rhythm—rocking, rolling, thrumming to a common beat at all scales, from the neural to the communal--qualifies as well.

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe